Angela M. Murrieta, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 4, 2008
0120082528 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 4, 2008)

0120082528

08-04-2008

Angela M. Murrieta, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Angela M. Murrieta,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120082528

Agency No. 4E852007308

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the agency's

decision dated April 29, 2008, dismissing her complaint of unlawful

employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.

Upon review, the Commission finds that complainant's complaint was

properly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for failure

to state a claim.

In a complaint dated April 22, 2008, complainant alleged that she

was subjected to discrimination on the bases of race (Not Identified)

and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when a coworker accused

her of creating a hostile work environment by yanking a package from

her hands; and when she, herself, was subjected to a hostile work

environment in the form of gossip, slander, allegations by coworkers

that she falsified documentation, a co-worker had access to personal

information, and co-workers treated her in a vindictive and malicious

manner, but management did not do anything.

In determining whether a harassment complaint states a claim in cases

where a complainant had not alleged disparate treatment regarding a

specific term, condition, or privilege of employment, the Commission

has repeatedly examined whether a complainant's harassment claims,

when considered together and assumed to be true, were sufficient to

state a hostile or abusive work environment claim. See Estate of

Routson v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, EEOC Request

No. 05970388 (February 26, 1999). Even if harassing conduct produces

no tangible effects, a complainant may assert a Title VII cause of

action if the discriminatory conduct was so severe or pervasive that it

created a work environment abusive to employees because of their race,

gender, religion, or national origin. Rideout v. Department of the Army,

EEOC Appeal No. 01933866 (November 22, 1995)( citing Harris v. Forklift

Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 22 (1993)) request for reconsideration denied

EEOC Request No. 05970995 (May 20, 1999).

Consistent with the Commission's policy and practice of determining

whether a complainant's harassment claims are sufficient to state a

hostile or abusive work environment claim, the Commission has repeatedly

found that claims of a few isolated incidents of alleged harassment

usually are not sufficient to state a harassment claim. See Phillips

v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05960030 (July 12,

1996); Banks v. Health and Human Services, EEOC Request No. 05940481

(February 16, 1995). Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly found that

remarks or comments unaccompanied by a concrete agency action usually are

not a direct and personal deprivation sufficient to render an individual

aggrieved for the purposes of Title VII. See Backo v. United States

Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05960227 (June 10, 1996); Henry v. United

States Postal Service, EEOC Request No.05940695 (February 9, 1995).

The Commission finds that the complaint fails to state a claim under the

EEOC regulations because complainant failed to sufficiently allege that

she suffered harm or loss with respect to a term, condition, or privilege

of employment for which there is a remedy. See Diaz v. Department of

the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994).

Accordingly, the agency's final decision dismissing complainant's

complaint is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0408)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the complainant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation

of material fact or law; or

2. The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the

policies, practices, or operations of the agency.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed

with the Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar

days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of

receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29

C.F.R. � 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for

29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests

and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. In the absence of a legible postmark, the

request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by

mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period.

See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604. The request or opposition must also include

proof of service on the other party.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances

prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation

must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission

will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only

in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604(c).

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0408)

You have the right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States

District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you

receive this decision. If you file a civil action, you must name as the

defendant in the complaint the person who is the official agency head

or department head, identifying that person by his or her full name and

official title. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your

case in court. "Agency" or "department" means the national organization,

and not the local office, facility or department in which you work. If you

file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0408)

If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot

afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint

an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the

action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).

The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of

the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time

in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action

must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above

("Right to File A Civil Action").

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

August 4, 2008

__________________

Date

2

0120082528

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

3

0120082528